Prevalence, management and outcomes of unrecognized delirium in a National Sample of 1,493 older emergency department patients: how many were sent home and what happened to them?

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies estimate Emergency Department (ED) delirium recognition at <20%; few prospective studies have assessed delirium recognition and outcomes for patients with unrecognized delirium. OBJECTIVES: To prospectively measure delirium recognition by ED nurses and physicians, document their confidence in diagnosis and disposition, actual dispositions, and patient outcomes. METHODS: Prospective observational study of people ≥65 years. We assessed delirium using the Confusion Assessment Method, then asked ED staff if the patient had delirium, confidence in their assessment, if the patient could be discharged, and contacted patients 1 week postdischarge. We report proportions and 95% confidence intervals (Cls). RESULTS: We enrolled 1,493 participants; mean age was 77.9 years; 49.2% were female, 79 (5.3%, 95% CI 4.2-6.5%) had delirium. ED nurses missed delirium in 43/78 cases (55.1%, 95% CI 43.4-66.4%). Nurses considered 12/43 (27.9%) patients with unrecognized delirium safe to discharge. Median confidence in their delirium diagnosis for patients with unrecognized delirium was 7.0/10. Physicians missed delirium in 10/20 (50.0%, 95% CI 27.2-72.8) cases and considered 2/10 (20.0%) safe to discharge. Median confidence in their delirium diagnosis for patients with unrecognized delirium was 8.0/10. Fifteen patients with unrecognized delirium were sent home: 6.7% died at 1 week follow-up vs. none in those with recognized delirium and 1.1% in the rest of the cohort. CONCLUSION: Delirium recognition by nurses and physicians was sub-optimal at ~50% and may be associated with increased mortality. Research should explore root causes of unrecognized delirium, and novel strategies to systematically improve delirium recognition and patient outcomes.

Connect 2 Care, a Novel Community Outreach Program for Vulnerably Housed Patients With High Acute Care Use: A Mixed-Methods Study Protocol.

Introduction: Vulnerably housed individuals, especially those experiencing homelessness, have higher acute care use compared with the general population. Despite available primary care and social services, many face significant challenges accessing needed services. Connect 2 Care (C2C) is a novel transitional case management program that includes registered nurses and health navigators with complementary expertise in chronic disease management, mental health and addictions, social programs, community health, and housing, financial, transportation and legal resources. C2C bridges acute care and community services to improve care coordination. Methods and Analysis: We will perform a mixed-methods evaluation of the C2C program according to the Donabedian framework of structure, process and outcome, to understand how program structure and process, coupled with contextual factors, influence outcomes in a novel intervention. Eligible patients are homeless or unstably housed adults with complex health conditions and high acute care use. Change in emergency department visit rate 12-months after program enrolment is the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include 12-month post-enrolment hospital admissions, cumulative hospital days, health-related quality of life, housing status, primary care attachment and substance use. Qualitative methods will explore experiences with the C2C program from multiple perspectives and an economic evaluation will assess cost-effectiveness. Discussion: Academic researchers partnered with community service providers to evaluate a novel transitional case management intervention for vulnerably housed patients with high acute-care use. The study uses mixed-methods to evaluate the Connect 2 Care program according to the Donabedian framework of structure, process and outcome, including an assessment of contextual factors that influence program success. Insights gained through this comprehensive evaluation will help refine the C2C program and inform decisions about sustainability and transferability to other settings in Canada.

The International Federation for Emergency Medicine report on emergency department crowding and access block: A brief summary.

OBJECTIVE: To develop comprehensive guidance that captures international impacts, causes and solutions related to emergency department (ED) crowding and access block. METHODS: Emergency physicians representing 15 countries from all International Federation of Emergency Medicine (IFEM) regions composed the Task Force. Monthly meetings were held via video-conferencing software to achieve consensus for report content. The report was submitted and approved by the IFEM Board on June 1, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 14 topic dossiers, each relating to an aspect of ED crowding, were researched and completed collaboratively by members of the Task Force. CONCLUSIONS: The IFEM report is a comprehensive document intended to be used in whole or by section to inform and address aspects of ED crowding and access block. Overall, ED crowding is a multifactorial issue requiring systems-wide solutions applied at local, regional, and national levels. Access block is the predominant contributor of ED crowding in most parts of the world.

Anaphylaxis-a 2020 practice parameter update, systematic review, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis.

Anaphylaxis is an acute, potential life-threatening systemic allergic reaction that may have a wide range of clinical manifestations. Severe anaphylaxis and/or the need for repeated doses of epinephrine to treat anaphylaxis are risk factors for biphasic anaphylaxis. Antihistamines and/or glucocorticoids are not reliable interventions to prevent biphasic anaphylaxis, although evidence supports a role for antihistamine and/or glucocorticoid premedication in specific chemotherapy protocols and rush aeroallergen immunotherapy. Evidence is lacking to support the role of antihistamines and/or glucocorticoid routine premedication in patients receiving low- or iso-osmolar contrast material to prevent recurrent radiocontrast media anaphylaxis. Epinephrine is the first-line pharmacotherapy for uniphasic and/or biphasic anaphylaxis. After diagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis, all patients should be kept under observation until symptoms have fully resolved. All patients with anaphylaxis should receive education on anaphylaxis and risk of recurrence, trigger avoidance, self-injectable epinephrine education, referral to an allergist, and be educated about thresholds for further care.

Patient classification based on volume and case-mix in the emergency department and their association with performance.

Predicting daily patient volume is necessary for emergency department (ED) strategic and operational decisions, such as resource planning and workforce scheduling. For these purposes, forecast accuracy requires understanding the heterogeneity among patients with respect to their characteristics and reasons for visits. To capture the heterogeneity among ED patients (case-mix), we present a patient coding and classification scheme (PCCS) based on patient demographics and diagnostic information. The proposed PCCS allows us to mathematically formalize the arrival patterns of the patient population as well as each class of patients. We can then examine the volume and case-mix of patients presenting to an ED and investigate their relationship to the ED's quality and time-based performance metrics. We use data from five hospitals in February, July and November for the years of 2007, 2012, and 2017 in the city of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. We find meaningful arrival time patterns of the patient population as well as classes of patients in EDs. The regression results suggest that patient volume is the main predictor of time-based ED performance measures. Case-mix is, however, the key predictor of quality of care in EDs. We conclude that considering both patient volume and the mix of patients are necessary for more accurate strategic and operational planning in EDs.

How do emergency departments and emergency leaders catalyze positive change through quality improvement collaborations?

OBJECTIVES: Quality Improvement and Patient Safety (QIPS) plays an important role in addressing shortcomings in optimal healthcare delivery. However, there is little published guidance available for emergency department (ED) teams with respect to developing their own QIPS programs. We sought to create recommendations for established and aspiring ED leaders to use as a pathway to better patient care through programmatic QIPS activities, starting internally and working towards interdepartmental collaboration. METHODS: An expert panel comprised of ten ED clinicians with QIPS and leadership expertise was established. A scoping review was conducted to identify published literature on establishing QIPS programs and frameworks in healthcare. Stakeholder consultations were conducted among Canadian healthcare leaders, and recommendations were drafted by the expert panel based on all the accumulated information. These were reviewed and refined at the 2018 CAEP Academic Symposium in Calgary using in-person and technologically-supported feedback. RESULTS: Recommendations include: creating a sense of urgency for improvement; engaging relevant stakeholders and leaders; creating a formal local QIPS Committee; securing funding and resources; obtaining local data to guide the work; supporting QIPS training for team members; encouraging interprofessional, cross-departmental, and patient collaborations; using an established QIPS framework to guide the work; developing reward mechanisms and incentive structures; and considering to start small by focusing on a project rather than a program. CONCLUSION: A list of 10 recommendations is presented as guiding principles for the establishment and sustainable deployment of QIPS activities in EDs throughout Canada and abroad. ED leaders are encouraged to implement our recommendations in an effort to improve patient care.

OBJECTIF: L'amélioration de la qualité et la sécurité des patients (AQSP) joue un rôle important dans la correction des lacunes observées dans la prestation optimale de soins. Toutefois, les équipes de soins au service des urgences (SU) disposent de peu de documentation sur la conception de leurs propres programmes d'AQSP. L'étude avait donc pour objectif l'élaboration de recommandations conçues à l'intention des chefs de file, nouveaux ou confirmés, au SU, et présentées comme une voie à emprunter pour améliorer les soins aux patients, par l'application d'activités programmatiques d'AQSP, tout d'abord au sein du service, puis entre services, grâce à la collaboration. MÉTHODE: Un groupe d'experts composé de 10 cliniciens en médecine d'urgence, ayant des compétences particulières en AQSP et en pouvoir d'influence, a été mis sur pied. Un examen de cadrage a été entrepris à la recherche de publications sur l'établissement de programmes d'AQSP et de cadres de travail s'y rapportant, en soins de santé. Des consultations ont été menées avec les parties intéressées parmi les chefs de file en soins de santé au Canada, et le groupe d'experts a rédigé une version préliminaire de recommandations fondées sur l'ensemble de l'information recueillie. Celles-ci ont été examinées et améliorées durant le Symposium sur les affaires universitaires 2018 de l'ACMU, à Calgary, à la suite de rétroactions communiquées en personne ou par voie électronique. RÉSULTATS: Les recommandations portaient sur : l'éveil d'un sentiment d'urgence à l'égard de l'amélioration; la mobilisation d'intervenants et de chefs de file compétents; la mise sur pied d'un comité local structuré d'AQSP; l'obtention de financement et de ressources; la disponibilité de données locales pour orienter le travail; le soutien de la formation des membres d'équipe en AQSP; la promotion de la collaboration entre professions, entre services et avec les patients; l'utilisation d'un cadre de travail d'AQSP déjà établi afin d'orienter le travail; l'élaboration d'un système de récompenses et de structures incitatives; la possibilité d'entreprendre, au début, des initiatives à petite échelle, soit des projets plutôt que des programmes. CONCLUSION: Les dix recommandations ont été présentées à titre de principes directeurs en vue de l'élaboration d'activités d'AQSP et de leur mise en œuvre durable dans les SU, au Canada et ailleurs dans le monde. Les chefs de file dans les SU sont invités à appliquer ces recommandations dans le but d'améliorer les soins aux patients.

Systematic Review Methodology for the Fatigue in Emergency Medical Services Project.

BACKGROUND: Guidance for managing fatigue in the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) setting is limited. The Fatigue in EMS Project sought to complete multiple systematic reviews guided by seven explicit research questions, assemble the best available evidence, and rate the quality of that evidence for purposes of producing an Evidence Based Guideline (EBG) for fatigue risk management in EMS operations. METHODS: We completed seven systematic reviews that involved searches of six databases for literature relevant to seven research questions. These questions were developed a priori by an expert panel and framed in the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) format and pre-registered with PROSPERO. Our target population was defined as persons 18 years of age and older classified as EMS personnel or similar shift worker groups. A panel of experts selected outcomes for each PICO question as prescribed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. We pooled findings, stratified by study design (experimental vs. observational) and presented results of each systematic review in narrative and quantitative form. We used meta-analyses of select outcomes to generate pooled effects. We used the GRADE methodology and the GRADEpro software to designate a quality of evidence rating for each outcome. RESULTS: We present the results for each systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). More than 38,000 records were screened across seven systematic reviews. The median, minimum, and maximum inter-rater agreements (Kappa) between screeners for our seven systematic reviews were 0.66, 0.49, and 0.88, respectively. The median, minimum, and maximum number of records retained for the seven systematic reviews was 13, 1, and 100, respectively. We present key findings in GRADE Evidence Profile Tables in separate publications for each systematic review. CONCLUSIONS: We describe a protocol for conducting multiple, simultaneous systematic reviews connected to fatigue with the goal of creating an EBG for fatigue risk management in the EMS setting. Our approach may be informative to others challenged with the creation of EBGs that address multiple, inter-related systematic reviews with overlapping outcomes.

Proposed Performance Measures and Strategies for Implementation of the Fatigue Risk Management Guidelines for Emergency Medical Services.

BACKGROUND: Performance measures are a key component of implementation, dissemination, and evaluation of evidence-based guidelines (EBGs). We developed performance measures for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) stakeholders to enable the implementation of guidelines for fatigue risk management in the EMS setting. METHODS: Panelists associated with the Fatigue in EMS Project, which was supported by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), used an iterative process to develop a draft set of performance measures linked to 5 recommendations for fatigue risk management in EMS. We used a cross-sectional survey design and the Content Validity Index (CVI) to quantify agreement among panelists on the wording and content of draft measures. An anonymous web-based tool was used to solicit the panelists' perceptions of clarity and relevance of draft measures. Panelists rated the clarity and relevance separately for each draft measure on a 4-point scale. CVI scores ≥0.78 for clarity and relevance were specified a priori to signify agreement and completion of measurement development. RESULTS: Panelists judged 5 performance measures for fatigue risk management as clear and relevant. These measures address use of fatigue and/or sleepiness survey instruments, optimal duration of shifts, access to caffeine as a fatigue countermeasure, use of napping during shift work, and the delivery of education and training on fatigue risk management for EMS personnel. Panelists complemented performance measures with suggestions for implementation by EMS agencies. CONCLUSIONS: Performance measures for fatigue risk management in the EMS setting will facilitate the implementation and evaluation of the EBG for Fatigue in EMS.

Evidence-Based Guidelines for Fatigue Risk Management in Emergency Medical Services.

BACKGROUND: Administrators of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) operations lack guidance on how to mitigate workplace fatigue, which affects greater than half of all EMS personnel. The primary objective of the Fatigue in EMS Project was to create an evidence-based guideline for fatigue risk management tailored to EMS operations. METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted from 1980 to September 2016 and guided by seven research questions framed in the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) framework. Teams of investigators applied inclusion criteria, which included limiting the retained literature to EMS personnel or similar shift worker groups. The expert panel reviewed summaries of the evidence based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The panel evaluated the quality of evidence for each PICO question separately, considered the balance between benefits and harms, considered the values and preferences of the targeted population, and evaluated the resource requirements/needs. The GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) Framework was used to prepare draft recommendations based on the evidence, and the Content Validity Index (CVI) was used to quantify the panel's agreement on the relevance and clarity of each recommendation. CVI scores for relevance and clarity were measured separately on a 1-4 scale to indicate consensus/agreement among panel members and conclusion of recommendation development. RESULTS: The EtD framework was applied to all 7 PICO questions, and the panel created 5 recommendations. PICO1: The panel recommends using fatigue/sleepiness survey instruments to measure and monitor fatigue in EMS personnel. PICO2: The panel recommends that EMS personnel work shifts shorter than 24 hours in duration. PICO3: The panel recommends that EMS personnel have access to caffeine as a fatigue countermeasure. PICO4: The panel recommends that, EMS personnel have the opportunity to nap while on duty to mitigate fatigue. PICO5: The panel recommends that EMS personnel receive education and training to mitigate fatigue and fatigue-related risks. The panel referenced insufficient evidence as the reason for making no recommendation linked to 2 PICO questions. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a review of the evidence, the panel developed a guideline with 5 recommendations for fatigue risk management in EMS operations.

Does Implementation of Biomathematical Models Mitigate Fatigue and Fatigue-related Risks in Emergency Medical Services Operations? A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Work schedules like those of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel have been associated with increased risk of fatigue-related impairment. Biomathematical modeling is a means of objectively estimating the potential impacts of fatigue on performance, which may be used in the mitigation of fatigue-related safety risks. In the context of EMS operations, our objective was to assess the evidence in the literature regarding the effectiveness of using biomathematical models to help mitigate fatigue and fatigue-related risks. METHODS: A systematic review of the evidence evaluating the use of biomathematical models to manage fatigue in EMS personnel or similar shift workers was performed. Procedures proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology were used to summarize and rate the certainty in the evidence. Potential bias attached to retained studies was documented using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool for experimental studies. RESULTS: The literature search strategy, which focused on both EMS personnel and non-EMS shift workers, yielded n = 2,777 unique records. One paper, which investigated non-EMS shift workers, met inclusion criteria. As part of a larger effort, managers and dispatchers of a trucking operation were provided with monthly biomathematical model analyses of predicted fatigue in the driver workforce, and educated on how they could reduce predicted fatigue by means of schedule adjustments. The intervention showed a significant reduction in the number and cost of vehicular accidents during the period in which biomathematical modeling was used. The overall GRADE assessment of evidence quality was very low due to risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision, and publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review identified no studies that investigated the impact of biomathematical models in EMS operations. Findings from one study of non-EMS shift workers were favorable toward use of biomathematical models as a fatigue mitigation scheduling aid, albeit with very low quality of evidence pertaining to EMS operations. We propose three focus areas of research priorities that, if addressed, could help better elucidate the utility and impact of biomathematical models as a fatigue-mitigation tool in the EMS environment.

Considering health equity when moving from evidence-based guideline recommendations to implementation: a case study from an upper-middle income country on the GRADE approach.

The availability of evidence-based guidelines does not ensure their implementation and use in clinical practice or policy making. Inequities in health have been defined as those inequalities within or between populations that are avoidable, unnecessary and also unjust and unfair. Evidence-based clinical practice and public health guidelines ('guidelines') can be used to target health inequities experienced by disadvantaged populations, although guidelines may unintentionally increase health inequities. For this reason, there is a need for evidence-based clinical practice and public health guidelines to intentionally target health inequities experienced by disadvantaged populations. Current guideline development processes do not include steps for planned implementation of equity-focused guidelines. This article describes nine steps that provide guidance for consideration of equity during guideline implementation. A critical appraisal of the literature followed by a process to build expert consensus was undertaken to define how to include consideration of equity issues during the specific GRADE guideline development process. Using a case study from Colombia we describe nine steps that were used to implement equity-focused GRADE recommendations: (1) identification of disadvantaged groups, (2) quantification of current health inequities, (3) development of equity-sensitive recommendations, (4) identification of key actors for implementation of equity-focused recommendations, (5) identification of barriers and facilitators to the implementation of equity-focused recommendations, (6) development of an equity strategy to be included in the implementation plan, (7) assessment of resources and incentives, (8) development of a communication strategy to support an equity focus and (9) development of monitoring and evaluation strategies. This case study can be used as model for implementing clinical practice guidelines, taking into account equity issues during guideline development and implementation.

GRADE equity guidelines 4: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: evidence to decision process.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to provide detailed guidance on how to incorporate health equity within the GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence) evidence to decision process. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We developed this guidance based on the GRADE evidence to decision framework, iteratively reviewing and modifying draft documents, in person discussion of project group members and input from other GRADE members. RESULTS: Considering the impact on health equity may be required, both in general guidelines and guidelines that focus on disadvantaged populations. We suggest two approaches to incorporate equity considerations: (1) assessing the potential impact of interventions on equity and (2) incorporating equity considerations when judging or weighing each of the evidence to decision criteria. We provide guidance and include illustrative examples. CONCLUSION: Guideline panels should consider the impact of recommendations on health equity with attention to remote and underserviced settings and disadvantaged populations. Guideline panels may wish to incorporate equity judgments across the evidence to decision framework. This is the fourth and final paper in a series about considering equity in the GRADE guideline development process. This series is coming from the GRADE equity subgroup.

Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Jugular Venous Pressure Assessment: Live and Online Learning Compared.

INTRODUCTION: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a novel technique for the assessment of jugular venous pressure. Distance education may allow for efficient dissemination of this technique. We compared online learning to a live course for teaching ultrasonography jugular venous pressure (u-JVP) to determine if these teaching methods yielded different levels of comfort with and use of u-JVP. METHODS: This was an interventional trial of Canadian emergency physicians who had taken a basic POCUS course. The participants were in one of three Groups: online learning (Group OL), live teaching (Group LT), control (Group C). Group LT participants also took an advanced course prior to the study that included instruction in u-JVP. The participants who took the basic course were randomized to Group OL or Group C. Group OL was subject to the intervention, online learning. Group C only received an article citation regarding u-JVP. Questionnaires were completed before and after the intervention. The primary outcome was physician self-reported use and comfort with the technique of u-JVP after online learning compared to live teaching. RESULTS: Of the 287 advanced course participants, 42 completed the questionnaires (Group LT). Of the 3303 basic course participants, 47 who were assigned to Group OL completed the questionnaires and 47 from Group C completed the questionnaires. Use of u-JVP increased significantly in Group OL (from 15% to 55%) and Group C (from 21% to 47%) with the intervention. The comfort with use did not differ between Group LT and Group OL (p=0.14). The frequency of use remained higher in Group LT than Group OL (p=0.07). CONCLUSION: Online learning increases the use and comfort with performing u-JVP for emergency physicians with prior POCUS experience. Although the comfort with use of u-JVP was similar in Groups LT and OL, online learning appears to yield levels of use that are less than those of a live course.

GRADE equity guidelines 2: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: equity extension of the guideline development checklist.

OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance for guideline developers on how to consider health equity at key stages of the guideline development process. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Literature review followed by group discussions and consensus building. RESULTS: The key stages at which guideline developers could consider equity include setting priorities, guideline group membership, identifying the target audience(s), generating the guideline questions, considering the importance of outcomes and interventions, deciding what evidence to include and searching for evidence, summarizing the evidence and considering additional information, wording of recommendations, and evaluation and use. We provide examples of how guidelines have actually considered equity at each of these stages. CONCLUSION: Guideline projects should consider the aforementioned suggestions for recommendations that are equity sensitive.

GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual framework for how to consider health equity in the Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence (GRADE) guideline development process. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Consensus-based guidance developed by the GRADE working group members and other methodologists. RESULTS: We developed consensus-based guidance to help address health equity when rating the certainty of synthesized evidence (i.e., quality of evidence). When health inequity is determined to be a concern by stakeholders, we propose five methods for explicitly assessing health equity: (1) include health equity as an outcome; (2) consider patient-important outcomes relevant to health equity; (3) assess differences in the relative effect size of the treatment; (4) assess differences in baseline risk and the differing impacts on absolute effects; and (5) assess indirectness of evidence to disadvantaged populations and/or settings. CONCLUSION: The most important priority for research on health inequity and guidelines is to identify and document examples where health equity has been considered explicitly in guidelines. Although there is a weak scientific evidence base for assessing health equity, this should not discourage the explicit consideration of how guidelines and recommendations affect the most vulnerable members of society.

Evidence-Based Guidelines for Fatigue Risk Management in EMS: Formulating Research Questions and Selecting Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Greater than half of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel report work-related fatigue, yet there are no guidelines for the management of fatigue in EMS. A novel process has been established for evidence-based guideline (EBG) development germane to clinical EMS questions. This process has not yet been applied to operational EMS questions like fatigue risk management. The objective of this study was to develop content valid research questions in the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework, and select outcomes to guide systematic reviews and development of EBGs for EMS fatigue risk management. METHODS: We adopted the National Prehospital EBG Model Process and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework for developing, implementing, and evaluating EBGs in the prehospital care setting. In accordance with steps one and two of the Model Process, we searched for existing EBGs, developed a multi-disciplinary expert panel and received external input. Panelists completed an iterative process to formulate research questions. We used the Content Validity Index (CVI) to score relevance and clarity of candidate PICO questions. The panel completed multiple rounds of question editing and used a CVI benchmark of ≥0.78 to indicate acceptable levels of clarity and relevance. Outcomes for each PICO question were rated from 1 = less important to 9 = critical. RESULTS: Panelists formulated 13 candidate PICO questions, of which 6 were eliminated or merged with other questions. Panelists reached consensus on seven PICO questions (n = 1 diagnosis and n = 6 intervention). Final CVI scores of relevance ranged from 0.81 to 1.00. Final CVI scores of clarity ranged from 0.88 to 1.00. The mean number of outcomes rated as critical, important, and less important by PICO question was 0.7 (SD 0.7), 5.4 (SD 1.4), and 3.6 (SD 1.9), respectively. Patient and personnel safety were rated as critical for most PICO questions. PICO questions and outcomes were registered with PROSPERO, an international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews. CONCLUSIONS: We describe formulating and refining research questions and selection of outcomes to guide systematic reviews germane to EMS fatigue risk management. We outline a protocol for applying the Model Process and GRADE framework to create evidence-based guidelines.

Development of the Canadian Syncope Risk Score to predict serious adverse events after emergency department assessment of syncope.

BACKGROUND: Syncope can be caused by serious conditions not evident during initial evaluation, which can lead to serious adverse events, including death, after disposition from the emergency department. We sought to develop a clinical decision tool to identify adult patients with syncope who are at risk of a serious adverse event within 30 days after disposition from the emergency department. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled adults (age ≥ 16 yr) with syncope who presented within 24 hours after the event to 1 of 6 large emergency departments from Sept. 29, 2010, to Feb. 27, 2014. We collected standardized variables at index presentation from clinical evaluation and investigations. Adjudicated serious adverse events included death, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, structural heart disease, pulmonary embolism, serious hemorrhage and procedural interventions within 30 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 4030 patients with syncope; the mean age was 53.6 years, 55.5% were women, and 9.5% were admitted to hospital. Serious adverse events occurred in 147 (3.6%) of the patients within 30 days after disposition from the emergency department. Of 43 candidate predictors examined, we included 9 in the final model: predisposition to vasovagal syncope, heart disease, any systolic pressure reading in the emergency department < 90 or > 180 mm Hg, troponin level above 99th percentile for the normal population, abnormal QRS axis (< -30° or > 100°), QRS duration longer than 130 ms, QTc interval longer than 480 ms, emergency department diagnosis of cardiac syncope and emergency department diagnosis of vasovagal syncope (C statistic 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.90; optimism 0.015; goodness-of-fit p = 0.11). The risk of a serious adverse event within 30 days ranged from 0.4% for a score of -3 to 83.6% for a score of 11. The sensitivity was 99.2% (95% CI 95.9%-100%) for a threshold score of -2 or higher and 97.7% (95% CI 93.5%-99.5%) for a threshold score of -1 or higher. INTERPRETATION: The Canadian Syncope Risk Score showed good discrimination and calibration for 30-day risk of serious adverse events after disposition from the emergency department. Once validated, the tool will be able to accurately stratify the risk of serious adverse events among patients presenting with syncope, including those at low risk who can be discharged home quickly.